SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
CNN reports that when asked how to offset the influence of big money in politics, President Barack Obama suggested it's time to make voting a requirement. "Other countries have mandatory voting," said Obama "It would be transformative if everybody voted -- that would counteract money more than anything," he said, adding it was the first time he had shared the idea publicly.
"The people who tend not to vote are young, they're lower income, they're skewed more heavily towards immigrant groups and minority groups. There's a reason why some folks try to keep them away from the polls."
At least 26 countries have compulsory voting, according to the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Failure to vote is punishable by a fine in countries such as Australia and Belgium; if you fail to pay your fine in Belgium, you could go to prison. Less than 37% of eligible voters actually voted in the 2014 midterm elections, according to The Pew Charitable Trusts. That means about 144 million Americans -- more than the population of Russia -- skipped out.
Critics of mandatory voting have questioned the practicality of passing and enforcing such a requirement; others say that freedom also means the freedom not to do something.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by HiThere on Sunday March 22 2015, @07:18PM
Term limits didn't work out particularly well in California. The crooked politico ran for higher office (see Diane Feinstein) and the more honest ones quit.
To be fair, Feinstein might well have run for higher office anyway, her chances for reelection as mayor weren't all that great as many people hated her. And some notably crooked politicos left. But it's much easier to replace a more crooked politico than a more honest one (with an equal).
Your other suggestions should pretty good, but difficult. What do you do about "independent support committees"? While I don't count spending money as "free speech" (because money isn't equally distributed) the Supreme Court does. And government sponsorship of candidates has all sorts of potential hooks...as in who counts as a legitimate candidate. The trade off we made of allowing easier registration of multiple parties against requiring the media networks to offer equal coverage hasn't worked out very well, largely because the electoral system is based on plurality rather than majority...but that problem wasn't obvious ahead of time.
I've nearly come to the point where I believe that instead of an election we should have a "draft lotter" managed by the Selective Service. "Your friends and neighbors have selected you to be State Senator....." There's a few places where currently centralized power would need to be diluted so that one "real winner" couldn't louse up everything, but that's a good idea anyway.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2015, @05:16PM
The culture in the US is far too corrupted and self-centered for that to work. People would rush for the chance to sell their influence so they could get out of poverty. I doubt even 20% of the people in the US would be able to see beyond themselves when it came to governance.